in  Land  Values 


Heoent  Increase 

^<1, 

b;* 

Scott  bearing 


1  3 


ci.3'£3 bu'XV^J’/' 

Trinity  College  Library 

Durham,  N.  C. 


Rec'd  3?^®’-.  _  .  /  _/_  1 

_ _  _  -- _ : _ 


tcpn^i/ed  : 


from  The  Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and 
Social  Science,  Philadelphia,  March,  1915. 


THE  RECENT  INCREASE  IN  LAND  VALUES 

By  Scott  Nearing,  Ph.D., 

Wharton  School,  University  of  Pennsylvania. 

1.  The  Significance  of  Land  Value  Increase 

The  recent  increase  in  land  values  is  of  immense  economic  and 
social  significance,  because  of  the  intimate  relation  which  exists 
between  this  phenomenon,  and  that  most  pressing  of  modern  eco¬ 
nomic  dilemmas, — the  rising  cost  of  living.  Although  the  pressure 
of  increased  living  costs  is  keenly  felt  on  every  hand,  few  people 
realize  what  an  important  part  the  increase  of  land  values  plays  in 
the  upward  movement  of  prices. 

Since  1896  prices  have  advanced  unequally.  Land  values  have 
apparently  played  a  large  part  in  this  inequality.  A  study  of  retail 
prices  shows  that  among  food  products,  prices  rose  most  rapidly  in 
the  case  of  meat,  dairy  products  and  cereals,  which  were  derived 
directly  from  the  land.  The  prices  of  raw  materials  show  a  like 
relation.  Timber,  grain,  and  other  raw  materials  obtained  directly 
from  the  land,  have  risen  rapidly  in  price,  while  semi-manufactured 
materials  have  increased  less  rapidly,  or  have  decreased  in  price. 

The  prices  of  those  materials  most  directly  secured  from  the 
land  have  risen  fastest.  Does  it  follow,  logically,  that  the  increase 
in  land  values  has  been  more  marked  than  the  increase  in  the  prices 
of  the  other  factors  entering  into  production? 

A  study  of  the  cost,  of  labor,  capital,  management,  land  and  the 
changing  cost  of  the  chief  items  of  expense  in  production  shows  that 
among  all  of  the  value  increases  reported  during  the  past  two  decades, 
the  increases  in  land  values  hold  first  place.1  The  cost  of  labor  and 
of  capital  have  increased  only  slightly  in  comparison.  There  is  no 
parallel  in  any  other  field,  to  the  advance  in  those  land  values  upon 
which  civilization  most  directly  depends — timber  lands,  fertile  agri¬ 
cultural  land,  and  land  in  large  commercial  and  industrial  centers. 
The  recent  rise  in  land  values  has  been  little  short  of  revolutionary. 

1  Reducing  the  Cost  of  Living,  Scott  Nearing.  Philadelphia:  Geo.  W. 
Jacobs  and  Co.  Chapters  8  to  15  inclusive. 

1 


rp/2  3  3  6> 


2 


The  Annals  of  the  American  Academy 


It  cannot  fail  to  leave  a  profound  impress  upon  the  economic  prob¬ 
lems  of  the  day. 

The  figures  for  land  value  increase  are  available  chiefly  for  farm 
lands,  city  land  and  timber  land.2  Though  the  material  in  these 
three  fields  is  far  from  complete,  it  is  sufficient  to  give  some  idea  of 
the  extent  of  land  value  increases. 

2.  Farm  Land  Values 

The  facts  pertaining  to  the  increase  in  farm  values  are  readily 
accessible.  The  Census  Bureau,  since  1850,  has  gone  into  great 
detail  in  its  discussion  of  farm  values.  The  censuses  of  1900  and 
1910  give  a  separate  statement  of  the  value  of  land  and  of  the  value 
of  buildings  on  the  farms  of  the  United  States.  Previous  to  1900, 
land  and  buildings  were  grouped  together.  The  last  two  censuses 
therefore  furnish  the  only  figures  showing  the  value  of  farm  land 
separate  from  the  value  of  the  improvements  on  the  land.  For 
those  two  censuses,  however,  the  figures  cover  the  value  of  farm  land 
over  the  entire  country. 

The  figures  of  the  thirteenth  census  show  that,  during  the  ten 
years  between  1900  and  1910,  the  value  of  all  farm  land  in  the  United 
States  increased  from  $13,058,000,000  to  $28,476,000,000.  The  per¬ 
centage  of  increase  is  118.1  per  cent.  Thus  in  one  decade,  the  value 
of  the  farm  land  in  the  United  States  was  more  than  doubled. 

Every  section  of  the  United  States  shared  in  this  farm  land 
increase — the  smallest  rise  in  farm  land  value  was  in  the  Middle 
Atlantic  States,  19.9  per  cent.  The  greatest  increase  was  in  the 
Mountain  States,  313.4  per  cent.  For  the  other  sections  of  the 
country,  the  increases  were: — New  England  States,  34.8  per  cent; 
East  North  Central  States,  82.0  per  cent;  East  South  Central  States, 
87.4  per  cent;  South  Atlantic  States,  109.3  per  cent;  West  North 
Central  States,  158.2  per  cent;  Pacific  States,  166.5  per  cent,  and 
West  South  Central  States,  184.8  per  cent.  The  smallest  increase  in 
total  value  is  reported  from  the  New  England  States  ($98,673,621); 
the  largest  is  reported  from  the  West  North  Central  States 
($6,159,683,640).  Thus  the  increase  in  the  value  of  the  land  in  the 
West  North  Central  States  alone  was  equal  to  almost  exactly  half  of 
the  total  value  of  all  of  the  farm  lands  in  the  United  States  in  1900. 

2  “The  Increase  of  American  Land  Values,”  Popular  Science  Monthly , 
November,  1913,  pp.  491-505. 


The  Recent  Increase  in  Land  Values 


3 


When  the  figures  for  farm  land  increase  are  analyzed  by  states, 
it  becomes  more  apparent  that  the  increasing  values  are  sectional 
..rather  than  general.  For  instance,  among  the  New  England  States — 
New  Hampshire,  Vermont,  and  Massachusetts  report  increases  in 
land  value  between  20  and  30  per  cent;  the  increase  for  Connecticut 
was  37  per  cent;  for  Rhode  Island,  12  per  cent,  and  for  Maine,  75 
per  cent.  The  ratio  of  increase  in  the  Middle  States  is  less  than 
that  in  New  England.  The  figures  for  New  York  are  48  per  cent; 
New  Jersey,  33  per  cent;  Pennsylvania,  9  per  cent.  The  increase 
for  Pennsylvania  is  the  smallest  shown  by  any  state  between  1900 
and  1910.  The  ratio  of  increase  among  the  East  North  Central 
States  varies  from  45  per  cent  in  Michigan,  to  104  per  cent  in  Illinois. 
The  variations  in  the  West  North  Central  States  are  much  greater. 
The  increase  in  farm  land  value  in  Minnesota  was  82  per  cent,  while 
in  South  Dakota,  it  was  377  per  cent.  Among  the  South  Atlantic 
States — Delaware,  Maryland,  Virginia,  and  West  Virginia  report  in¬ 
creases  of  less  than  100  per  cent  in  farm  land  values.  Kentucky  and 
Tennessee,  from  the  East  South  Central  group,  and  Louisiana  from 
the  West  South  Central  group  also  report  land  value  increases  of 
less  than  100  per  cent.  All  of  the  other  Southern  States  show^ 
increases  of  more  than  100  per  cent.  In  the  lead  are  Florida,  with 
an  increase  of  204  per  cent,  and  Oklahoma,  with  an  increase  of  334 
per  cent.  Only  three  among  the  Mountain  and  Pacific  States  report 
increases  in  farm  land  values  of  less  than  200  per  cent.  They  were 
Utah,  Nevada,  and  California.  The  increase  in  farm  land  values 
in  Colorado  was  302  per  cent,  in  Montana,  330  per  cent;  in  Wash¬ 
ington,  421  per  cent;  in  New  Mexico,  470  per  cent;  and  in  Idaho, 
519  per  cent. 

These  figures  for  increasing  farm  values  take  on  additional 
significance  when  a  comparison  is  made  with  the  acreage  of  the  farms. 
During  the  decade  between  1900  and  1910,  when  the  value  of  land 
in  American  farms  increased  118.  per  cent,  the  total  acreage  of  im¬ 
proved  farm  land  increased  only  15.4  per  cent.  Nowhere  is  the 
increase  in  the  improved  farm  land  acreage  in  any  sense  commen¬ 
surate  with  the  increase  in  farm  land  values.  The  New  England 
States  and  the  Middle  Atlantic  States,  with  increases  of  ninety-eight 
and  two  hundred  forty-two  millions  respectively  in  farm  land  values, 
report  decreases  in  the  acreage  in  improved  farm  land.  The  decrease 
for  New  England  was  10.8  per  cent,  and  for  the  Middle  Atlantic 


4 


The  Annals  of  the  American  Academy 


States,  4.8  per  cent.  The  East  North  Central  States,  with  three  and 
a  quarter  billions  increase  in  farm  land  values,  report  an  increase  in 
improved  farm  land  acreage  of  only  2.6  per  cent;  while  the  West  North 
Central  States,  with  their  stupendous  six  billions  of  farm  land  increase 
(158.2  per  cent),  show  an  increase  in  the  acreage  of  improved  farm 
land  of  only  21.1  per  cent.  The  increases  in  improved  acreage  for 
the  other  sections  of  the  country  are:  South  Atlantic  States,  5.2 
per  cent;  East  South  Central  States,  9.2  per  cent;  West  South  Cen¬ 
tral,  46.5  per  cent;  Mountain  States,  89.4  per  cent,  and  Pacific 
States,  17.5  per  cent.  If  these  figures  for  increase  in  improved 
farm  land  acreage  are  compared  with  the  figures  given  in  the  pre¬ 
ceding  paragraph,  showing  increase  in  farm  land  values,  the  differ¬ 
ences  are  astounding.  Values  have  increased  far  faster  than  acreage. 

The  census  tables  showing  the  increasing  per  acre  value  of  all 
farm  land,  and  of  improved  farm  land,  fully  bear  out  the  suggestions 
offered  by  the  contrast  between  farm  land  values  and  farm  land 
acreage.  The  value  of  land  in  farms  is  increasing  far  more  rapidly 
than  the  area  in  farms. 

A  further  analysis  of  the  crop  yields  per  acre  fails  to  show  any 
increasing  yields  for  the  increasing  farm  land  values.  Neither  cereal 
crops  nor  meat  products  have  greatly  increased  in  the  per  acre 
yield,  during  the  past  ten  years.  Indeed,  in  a  few  cases,  the  per 
acre  yield  in  cereal  crops  has  actually  decreased.  Meanwhile  the 
value  per  acre  has  been  moving  rapidly  upward. 

The  elaborate  census  figures  on  farm  land  values  are  unavailable 
for  comparison  previous  to  19.00,  because  of  the  failure  in  earlier 
censuses  to  separate  the  value  of  farm  lands  from  the  value  of  farm 
buildings.  The  last  two  censuses,  by  making  this  separation,  have 
made  possible  a  statement  of  the  phenomenal  farm  land  value  in¬ 
crease  which  occurred  during  the  first  decade  of  the  twentieth  century. 

3.  City  Land  Values 

A  scientific  statement  of  the  increase  in  city  land  values  is 
impossible.  During  many  years,  persons  interested  in  land  taxation 
have  been  compiling  individual  instances  of  the  increase  in  city  land 
values.3  It  is  only  within  recent  years  that  official  figures  have  been 

8  See,  for  example,  The  A  B  C  of  Taxation,  C.  B.  Fillebrown.  New  York: 
Doubleday,  Page  and  Co.,  1912. 


The  Recent  Increase  in  Land  Values 


5 


sufficiently  definite  and  extensive  to  warrant  even  the  most  general 
conclusions. 

There  seems  to  be  no  question  but  that  city  lands,  are,  on  the 
whole,  increasing  in  value.  The  extent  of  the  increase  is  suggested 
by  the  records  which  are  available  in  that  rapidly  growing  group 
of  cities  which  publish  separate  assessments  for  land  values  and  for 
improvement  values.  The  figures  showing  city  land  value  assess¬ 
ments  are  far  from  accurate.  The  failure  to  adopt  any  standard 
method  of  assessment  has  made  comparison  between  the  figures  for 
different  cities  difficult  or  impossible.  The  best  idea  of  the  increase 
in  city  land  values  can  be  gained  from  an  examination  of  the  facts 
for  a  number  of  individual  cities. 

The  most  complete  contemporary  figures  are  published  in  the 
report  of  the  Commissioners  of  Taxes  and  Assessments  of  the  City 
of  New  York.  A  separate  assessment  of  land  and  improvements 
has  been  made  in  New  York  only  since  July  1,  1906.  At  that  date, 
the  ordinary  land  value  for  Greater  New  York  was  $3,367,233,746. 
On  January  1,  1914,  this  land  value  had  been  increased  to 
$4,602,852, 107.4  The  tentative  valuation  for  1915  is  $4, 778, 836, 786. 5 
During  a  period  of  approximately  eight  years,  in  which  there  has 
been  no  increase  in  the  size  of  the  city,  the  land  values  of  New  York 
have  increased  about  one  and  a  quarter  billions — an  amount  equal 
to  rather  more  than  a  third  of  the  total  land  values  for  1906. 

The  increase  in  the  land  values  of  New  York  City  has  been  very 
unevenly  distributed  among  the  different  boroughs.  In  the  Borough 
of  Manhattan,  which  reports  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  total  land 
values  for  the  entire  city,  the  increase  between  1906  and  1915  has 
been  only  about  one-fifth;  in  the  Borough  of  the  Bronx,  the  increase 
is  equal  to  three-quarters  of  the  land  values  for  1906;  in  the  Borough 
of  Brooklyn,  the  increase  has  been  slightly  less  than  half;  in  the 
Borough  of  Queens,  the  increase  has  been  almost  four-fold;  in  the 
Borough  of  Richmond,  it  is  slightly  more  than  double. 

The  figures  for  Boston6  land  values  are  available  between  1889 

4  Report  of  Commissioners  of  Taxes  and  Assessments  of  the  City  of  New 
York,  1914. 

6  Letter  from  the  Department  of  Taxes  and  Assessments,  October  19, 

1914. 

8  Annual  Report  of  the  Assessing  Department  for  the  year  1913.  City  of 
Boston  Printing  Department,  1914,  p.  18. 


6 


The  Annals  of  the  American  Academy 


and  1914.  In  1889,  the  total  land  value  was  $350,404,975,  and  in 
1914,  the  value  was  $722,736,200.  The  Boston  land  values  have, 
therefore,  doubled  in  twenty-four  years.  Between  1906  and  1913, 
the  Boston  land  values  increased  about  12  per  cent.  While  there 
has  been  no  time  at  which  the  rise  in  Boston  land  values  has  been 
extremely  rapid,  there  is  no  record  of  a  year  when  the  land  values 
of  the  city  have  decreased. 

The  figures  for  Washington,  D.  C.,7  available  between  1889  and 
1914,  show  an  increase  from  $56,585,904  to  $169,212,099.  This 
three-fold  increase  has  occurred  in  the  same  period  during  which 
the  Boston  land  values  doubled.  The  rise  in  land  values  in  Wash¬ 
ington  has  been  particularly  irregular.  In  1894,  the  land  values 
were  reported  as  $112,830,383;  in  1905,  the  values  were  $118,912,580. 

Buffalo  reports  a  separation  of  land  and  improvement  values 
from  1907  to  1914.  In  1907,  the  total  land  value  was  $164,693,675; 
in  1914,  $177, 990, 040. 8  The  increase  in  this  case  is  negligible. 

The  land  value  figures  for  Milwaukee  show  an  increase  between 

1890  and  1910,  from  $52,385,960  to  $99,502,195.  Since  1910,  the 
assessments  in  Milwaukee  have  been  made  upon  full  valuation, 
instead  of  the  former  60  per  cent;  hence  the  figures  since  that  date 
are  not  strictly  comparable.9 

The  land  values  and  improvement  values  in  Kansas  City, 
Missouri,  have  been  separated  since  1891.  In  that  year,  the  land 
values  of  the  city  were  $53,171,420;  in  1914,  the  land  values  were 
$72,176,920.  The  increase  was  thus  approximately  two-fifths  of  the 

1891  land  values.10 

The  records  from  western  cities  show  more  rapid  rates  of  in¬ 
crease  than  those  in  the  East.  In  Dallas,  Texas,  the  city  land  value 
was  $16,477,225  for  1907;  and  $51,996,900  for  1914.u  The  figures 
from  Portland,  Oregon,  show  a  land  value,  in  1900,  of  $39,512,150. 
The  value  for  1914  was  $54,832,600.  In  San  Francisco,  the  land 
value  in  1905,  was  $304,135,385;  for  1914,  $304,579,974.  The  figures 
for  San  Francisco  are,  of  course,  influenced  by  the  losses  due  to  the 

7  Letter  from  the  Assessor  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  October  20,  1914. 

8  Letter  from  the  Department  of  Assessment,  Buffalo,  New  York,  October, 

1914. 

a  Letter  from  the  Tax  Commissioner  of  Milwaukee,  December  31,  1912. 

10  Letter  from  the  City  Assessor  of  Kansas  City,  Missouri,  October  24, 

1914. 

11  Letter  from  the  Commissioner  of  Finance  and  Revenue,  October  22, 

1914. 


The  Recent  Increase  in  Land  Values 


7 


earthquake.  On  the  whole,  and  with  a  few  exceptions,  it  appears 
that  the  ratio  of  increase  for  city  land  values  has  been  far  less  than 
that  for  farm  land  values.12 

4.  Timber  Land  Values. 

A  recent  study  made  by  the  federal  government  has  thrown 
considerable  light  upon  the  question  of  timber  land  values.  For 
years,  wholesale  price  lists  have  shown  a  marked  increase  in  the 
values  of  lumber  and  lumber  products.  This  rise  in  the  price  of 
the  raw  material  is  a  striking  reflection  of  the  increased  price  of  the 
land  from  which  timber  is  secured. 

The  federal  investigators  encountered  great  difficulty  in  reach¬ 
ing  definite  conclusions  regarding  the  increase  in  timber  land  values. 
One  piece  of  timber  land  in  a  given  locality  frequently  increased  in 
value  much  more  rapidly  than  another  piece.  The  situation  with 
respect  to  transportation  facilities,  the  kind  of  lumber,  the  conditions 
under  which  the  owner  was  willing  to  dispose  of  the  tract — all  had 
a  marked  influence  upon  the  per  acre  value  of  the  timber  land. 

Despite  the  impossibility  of  measuring  accurately  the  average 
amount  of  the  advance  in  timber  land  values,  due  to  the  extreme 
variations  of  “location,  species,  quality  and  stand,”  the  federal  report 
derives  certain  general  statements  which,  while  not  applying  to  any 
one  individual  tract,  bespeak  the  prevailing  conditions  over  a  con¬ 
siderable  territory. 

The  men  who  compiled  the  federal  report  comment  with  aston¬ 
ishment  upon  the  increase  in  timber  land  values,  generally. 

That  the  increase  has  been  nothing  less  than  enormous  is  recognized 
by  the  men  most  familiar  with  the  business.  In  speaking  of  the  rise  of  prices 
in  the  last  twenty  years,  they  refer  to  changes  from  12£  cents  to  $4  a  thousand; 
from  10  cents  to  S3  a  thousand;  from  $5  to  S20  an  acre;  300  per  cent  in  ten  years; 
from  $1.50  to  $20  an  acre;  from  50  cents  to  $3  a  thousand.  These  figures  are 
for  southern  pine.  In  cypress:  from  15  cents  to  $5  a  thousand.  In  the  Lake 
states  men  in  the  business  similarly  speak  of  increases  from  “no  market  value” 
(hemlock  and  hardwoods)  $4  to  $10  a  thousand;  from  $2  to  $6  a  thousand 
(hardwoods).  In  the  Pacific-Northwest  similar  general  statements  are  made 
of  rises  in  value,  such  as  15  cents  to  $2.50  a  thousand,  10  cents  to  $2.50  a  thou¬ 
sand;  “no  market  value”  to  $2.50  a  thousand;  75  cents  to  $2.50  a  thousand.1* 


12  Letter  from  the  Assessor’s  Office,  San  Francisco,  October  22,  1914. 

15  The  Lumber  Industry,  Part  1,  Standing  Timber.  Washington:  Govern¬ 
ment  Printing  Office,  1913,  p.  25. 


8 


The  Annals  op  the  American  Academy 


There  is  a  widespread  recognition  among  initiated  timber 
experts  of  the  immensity  of  the  timber  land  value  increase.  The 
obstacles  to  an  accurate  estimate  of  timber  land  value  increases 
are  patent.  Nevertheless,  the  federal  investigators  are  willing  to 
commit  themselves  to  certain  general  propositions.  Speaking  in 
broad  terms,  and  for  the  ten  year  period  ending  in  1907  or  1908 
with  the  industrial  depression,  it  seems  that  “the  value  of  a  given 
piece  of  southern  pine  taken  at  random  is  likely  to  have  increased 
in  any  ratio  from  threefold  to  tenfold.”14  Numerous  instances  were 
discovered  where  the  increase  was  much  more  rapid  than  these  figures 
show',  as  for  example,  when  tracts  which  could  be  purchased  in 
1896  or  1898  at  10  to  15  cents  a  thousand  feet  upon  the  stump,  had 
advanced  twenty  or  even  thirty  fold  in  ten  years.  The  figures  from 
the  lake  region  tend  to  show  that 

the  general  ratio  of  advance  of  timber  values  during  the  last  ten  or  twenty 
years  has  probably  been  less  than  in  the  south.  Perhaps  the  advance  of  any 
given  tract,  taken  at  random,  in  ten  years  from  1898  was  most  likely  to  be 
between  two-fold  and  five-fold.15 

Timber  land  values  in  the  Northwest  have  increased  about  as 
rapidly  as  timber  land  values  in  the  South.  “A  tract  taken  at 
random,  is  likely  to  have  increased  in  any  ratio  from  threefold  to 
tenfold  in  the  ten  years  ending  in  1907  or  1908. ”18  The  federal 
report  indicates,  however,  that  the  proportion  of  extraordinarily 
rapid  increases  in  land  value  “is  probably  greater  than  in  the  South.” 

The  value  of  the  land  on  which  timber  products  are  produced 
has  increased  with  inordinate  rapidity.  Perhaps  there  is  no  single 
phase  of  the  problem  presented  by  the  increase  in  land  value  where 
the  cause  of  increase  is  more  apparent  than  in  the  case  of  timber 
land  values.  Timber  is  universally  used.  The  rate  of  use  in  the 
United  States  is  said  to  be  approximately  four  times  as  great  as  the 
rate  of  increase  in  supply.  The  result  of  this  situation  upon  prices 
and  values  needs  no  comment. 

Among  all  of  the  figures  showing  increases  in  land  values  in 
the  past  two  decades,  those  furnished  by  the  federal  report  and  by 

14  Ibid,  p.  214. 

15  Idem. 

u  Ibid,  p.  215. 


The  Recent  Increase  in  Land  Values 


9 


private  correspondence  for  timber  lands  stand  out  with  remarkable 
distinctness.  The  increase  in  timber  land  values  is  without  parallel 
in  the  present  land  value  situation  in  the  United  States. 

5.  The  Phenomenal  Rise  in  Land  Values 

The  land  value  facts  at  hand,  covering  all  of  the  farm  land  of 
the  United  States,  a  number  of  representative  cities,  and  the  impor¬ 
tant  timber  areas  of  the  country,  indicate  that  the  recent  increase 
in  land  values  has  been  nothing  short  of  astounding.  The  phenome¬ 
non  cannot  be  explained  away.  Neither  the  enthusiasm  of  local 
assessors  nor  the  misdirected  efforts  of  badly  trained  investigators 
would  account  for  a  condition  so  universal.  American  land  values 
are  rapidly  rising. 

Prices  are  increasing  everywhere.  Since  1896,  price-increase  has 
been  omnipresent,  yet  no  record  of  rising  prices  is  so  extreme  as  the 
record  of  the  increase  of  the  value  of  those  particularly  choice  bits 
of  the  earth’s  surface  which,  because  of  favorable  location  or  unusual 
fertility,  are  in  great  demand. 

Whatever  the  validity  of  Malthus’s  theories,  there  can  be  no 
question  that  the  increase  in  population  is  augmenting  the  pressure 
on  the  most  desirable  land  in  the  community.  The  relation  of  in¬ 
crease  in  population  to  increase  in  land  values  is  intimate.  Each 
twelve-month  witnesses  the  addition  of  more  than  two  million  people 
to  the  population  of  the  United  States.  Meanwhile,  the  number  of 
acres  of  first  class  wheat  land  and  cotton  land;  the  number  of  million 
board  feet  of  standing  timber;  the  number  of  tons  of  iron  ore  or  coal 
still  in  the  ground,  and  the  number  of  desirable  sites  for  commercial 
centers,  either  fail  to  increase,  or,  as  in  case  of  timber  and  mineral 
desposits,  actually  decrease.  The  amount  of  good  land  is  fixed.  The 
pressure  of  increasing  population  against  the  fixity  of  natural  re¬ 
sources,  results  inevitably  in  rising  values. 

The  lesson  of  the  recent  increase  in  land  values  is  inescapable. 
Each  passing  year  makes  it  more  evident  that  the  owners  of  the 
most  desirable  pieces  of  the  earth’s  surface  have  a  monopoly  power 
which,  intensified  by  each  addition  to  the  population  and  each 
progressive  step  of  civilization,  enables  them  to  place  an  ever  increas¬ 
ing  tax  upon  the  activities  of  the  community. 


Date  Due 

L.  E.  Gat.  No.  1137 

